CMHC gives up on goal to return to 2004 housing affordability levels

[bazokajoe]

With the increase in building materials and labour, the CMHC should have realized that in 2006 at the latest.

 

[Goodoer]

Force density and single-family dwellings upon the cities. Grandma and Grandpa have to live in their own house or an old-folks home. Stop the monster houses.

 

[southpaw]

Free market based, whining, crying crocodile tears developers who have never miss an opportunity to landfall profit, tell the gov't to "get out of our way" in boom times, BUT always, always, always cry for the gov't to step in to help them in "bust times" that they themselves have grossly helped to create.

Agreed. No bailouts for banks, developers, or anyone else. Let the market crash. It will improve housing affordability for everyone. This is how free markets are supposed to work.

 

[Butler1000]

Most new real estate development are rentals. That's the direction the country is headed... into a renter society.

When government officials talk about affordable housing, they're no longer talking about houses that are affordable to buy. They're talking about affordable rentals. The housing minister's doublespeak one month ago, made this very clear.

The dog crate condos that aren't selling right now are what homes in major Canadian cities are going to look like in the future. They're hardly livable by Canadian standards today, but those standards are going to shift as the years go by.

What does "banning corporations from owning residential homes" mean and how does it work?

All the apartment buildings in the city are owned by corporations. They're residential [shoebox] homes, for the people living in them. If you're going to tell citizens that a handful of corporations are allowed to monopolize ownership of rentals while ordinary citizens cannot own real estate for the purpose of being a landlord, you're not going to get far.

Ban them from owning single family dwellings, townhouses, individual condos, trailers in parks. Large apartment buildings are designed to be owned by corporations. But private equity groups have been buying up the former, and either hiking rents, or in some cases allowing them to sit empty to further lower prices on a street, buy them up by paying cash and then rent sell at a profit. Or to gentrify years later but in the meantime allow the area to slowly die.

Notice I said individuals can own more homes, up to two more, for investment purposes. That does allow people to buy property for that, also for later downsizing, help out family etc, while preventing mass buying and ownership.

It's not difficult to set up rules to reflect this.

 

[Butler1000]

Force density and single-family dwellings upon the cities. Grandma and Grandpa have to live in their own house or an old-folks home. Stop the monster houses.

Depends. There are lots of people who have multigenerational homes. Especially in immigrant families. There can be a place for them. And yes some rich people should be able to have larger properties like in Rosedale and the Bridlepath.

Allowing the developers to subdivide larger properties when they do get sold in a cleaner option in my opinion.

 

[Frankfooter]

For Toronto, the disconnect is some potential homeowners(especially the people who are still having kids these days) want land but enviro regulations put in the place around 20 years ago call for density.
So, is everyone going to start living on top of libraries and subway stations and parking lots?

Housing starts in this province are the lowest in Canada under DoFo.
Even with his gift to developer of cutting development fees and making cities and towns pay them.
Right wingers dream of new single family housing but there is no land for that inside Toronto so you have to take Canada's best farmland for cookie cutter townhouses instead.

The most desirable condos are near subways now.

 

[jeff2]

Housing starts in this province are the lowest in Canada under DoFo.
Even with his gift to developer of cutting development fees and making cities and towns pay them.
Right wingers dream of new single family housing but there is no land for that inside Toronto so you have to take Canada's best farmland for cookie cutter townhouses instead.

The most desirable condos are near subways now.

I'm am not a big fan of developers but there also seems to be some denial about things when you have mass immigration and green belts and NIMBYS.

 

[Frankfooter]

I'm am not a big fan of developers but their also seems to be some denial about things when you have mass immigration and green belts and NIMBYS.
View attachment 451704

Only about 4% of the country is good farmland. The Greenbelt is a big part of that.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1610680995321188374

 

[jeff2]

Only about 4% of the country is good farmland. The Greenbelt is a big part of that.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1610680995321188374

I can see interest in species being protected. Vertical indoor farming may be the future.

 

[nottyboi]

Force density and single-family dwellings upon the cities. Grandma and Grandpa have to live in their own house or an old-folks home. Stop the monster houses.

Yes houses over a certain sqft should pay a much higher mill rate.

 

[Skoob]

Yet you support the party of big corporations. The party of free enterprise. We know that big corporations have the big advantage in free enterprise. What did Harper and/or PP do to help regular people afford homes?

The last time Harper was in power was a decade ago. Poilievre has never been in power. You may want to focus on what Trudeau did and not pretend the last 10 years didn't happen.

 

[Skoob]

Uhhh .... sure, yeah right ..... whatever. u say.

Slow day? Run out of cars to set on fire?